My mother has around $100,000 that she wants to grow left from a deceased family member...

>dump a portion between 25%-50% in the first month and then drip feed the rest over the year

Is there any explanation for that? I could use the knowledge

Build your own portfolio. Learn about how to neutralize market risk, how to hedge, yadda yadda. Once you start actually building the portfolio, you'll allocate how much gold you want and how much us equities you want. Say you wanted 5% in gold. When you got to 6% in gold, you sell off enough gold to retain 5% holdings. With that extra money, you'll probably need to buy in some more positions somewhere else.

I don't get the reasoning, I'm not a financial advisor anything. I've just worked for them.

investopedia.com/terms/d/dollarcostaveraging.asp

I guess it's just this really. If you buy now and it shits itself in a few months you are averaging down and you minimised your losses, but, if it goes way up well you made great money anyway, keep contributing.

investopedia.com/terms/d/dollarcostaveraging.asp

why does vanguard get shilled here so hard, its so plebian.

there are literally thousands of similar funds to choose from..
aboutus.aberdeen-asset.com/aboutus/

Vanguard has extremely low costs for funds

compared to who?

All I've done is mess around with about a few hundred bucks on robinhood, I really don't think I have the know-how to do this effectively.

Are index funds listed on the exchange, or are they the same as the ETF?

Should I buy VOO and VOOG?

Or are they privately listed when you actually sign up for a vanguard account?

investopedia.com/articles/etfs-mutual-funds/062716/fidelity-vs-vanguard-which-better-suited-you.asp

>*citation needed

pressroom.vanguard.com/nonindexed/7.23.2012_Dollar-cost_Averaging.pdf

Lump sum investing beats dollar-cost averaging about two-thirds of the time, historically speaking.

>2016
>Would it not be better to wait until at least late 2017, in case the market crashes again?

>2009
>Would it not be better to wait until at least late 2010, since we might not have hit the bottom?

>2010
>Would it not be better to wait until at least late 2011, since this is a dead-cat bounce?

>2011
>Would it not be better to wait until at least late 2012, since we had a flat year?

>2012
>Would it not be better to wait until at least late 2013, since we just high new market highs?

>2013
>Would it not be better to wait until at least late 2014, since this growth can't be sustained?

>2014
>Would it not be better to wait until at least late 2015, in case the market crashes again?

You can't time the market.

>cites vangaurd
lol

you know why they wanna make sure you get in all your money at once right?

It's a study performed with market data. They ran a Monte Carlo simulation using historical market performances. It's not some opinion piece or marketing material. It's a fucking white paper.

So unless you think Vanguard is committing investing fraud by publishing manufactured data, the facts are the facts.

LSI beats DCA 66% of the time.

think about it .

if you were to invest your chunk at every vanguard down swing , how is that not a better strategy than just randomly plunking it all in one day?

lol. thats an absolute closed study.

i've ran my own simulations, i can tell you , that one is EXTREMELY biased.

but believe what you want, mark.

I'm in a similar situation, but 400k instead of 100k.

Do a 3-fund Portfolio and forget about it. Increase Bond % if you wish to be more conservative.

Do not time the market.
Do not time the market.
Do not time the market.

These admiral funds have expense ratios of around 0.05%.
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund Admiral Shares (VTSAX)
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund Admiral Shares (VTIAX)
Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Fund Admiral Shares (VBTLX)

A "financial adviser" will charge you 1%-2% per year. That's around 40 times as much as a vanguard fund!

First of all, there's no such thing as a "Vanguard down swing." Vanguard is not a publicly traded company. The markets may rise and fall, individual funds, stocks and other investments may move. Please note the difference.

Second, not timing the market precludes buying "dips". You have no idea what the market is going to do, not whether a "dip" is temporary or a prelude to further decreases. The very question assumes that you can predict future near-time price movements, which is demonstrably false.

If you don't like the study, go invest how you want. No one cares. If you think the study is wrong, prove it. I'll not hold my breath.

>thinks people who invest in low-cost index funds are "marks"
>thinks he's not pants-on-head retarded

...

>2011.
>You "invest your chunk at every vanguard down swing , how is that not a better strategy than just randomly plunking it all in one day"!
>waiting
>waiting
>yfw S&P 500 goes up 94%
>yfw you sit on cash for 5 years

i put some money in natural resources, did i fuck up??

dump it in xle and let it sit. Oil is a limited resource and demand is always going up. XLE used to be over 100 and now it's below 70

well, you better start learning. the best money manager in the world is yousrelf

>don't time the market
Ok fine
I'm not comfortable purchasing US equities at their current price my risk tolerance is too low
I will remain in cash outside my tax advantaged accounts until such time as I find the US equities matkets not overpriced

Is this market timing

>>yfw S&P 500 goes up 94%
>>yfw you sit on cash for 5 years
This. Part of the reason 2014 was such a great year for the markets was that so many people realized they were so spooked by 2008 that they were missing the greatest bull market of their lifetimes. Investing inflows were incredible (mostly into the wrong asset sectors, but that's another story), and brokers even made TV ads telling people it was time to get back in the game.

thats why i reccomend diversity amongst different funds.

but you wont hear that on the vangaurd website. shillington.

and NO stock has every rocketed upwards

dont' you know that those postitive and negative fluctuations in price make a huge difference when dollar cost averaging?//
your literally buying in cheaper

im not gonna explain the math to you, if u cant grok it , then fuck ur brain.

That's why you invest the day(s) after a large market correction. But also note, Vanguard does not fall in value as the net asset value of the fund(s) is not decided by the market but, instead, by the fund(s) manager(s).

Please enlighten us with the trading dates "after a large market correction" over the last 5 years.

>VANGAURD IS ALWAYS UP GUYS!!!

>literally not true

>don't time the market

your face is a fucking penis.

just look at the charts.
now babby.. tell me at what points you would rather put your money in?

>Is this market timing
Yes.

Not choosing to invest in equities because they're too volatile, because your investing horizon is too short, or because they don't meeting your growth and income needs is perfectly fine and normal.

Not choosing to invest in equities because you have a prediction about the short-term future price of equities is timing the market.

>the net asset value of the fund(s) is not decided by the market but, instead, by the fund(s) manager(s)
Literally WTF? Please Google "mark to market" and get started on a sound financial education.

>VANGAURD IS ALWAYS UP GUYS!!!
>shows short term chart of S&P 500
Vanguard isn't a stock, dummy. There are probably 50 companies that have S&P 500 funds, some with fees as low as Vanguard. Go choose them if you want. No one cares.

Did Jack Bogle touch you as a child?

>vanguard isn't a stock.

fuck do you think we are talking about here
the vanguard total market index fund is a publicly traded stock...

surely were not on the same planet here

or you just a troll contrarian who does this as a means of attention and social interaction?

you should ask that person you have a crush on on a date , and just see how it goes.

nasdaq.com/symbol/voo/stock-chart

That's only one fund that they manage bud.

Do your own research and DD. But look at the dips in my picture. All excellent buying opportunities as long as you don't freak out on the day-of and remember "the markets (usually) always go up."

>tell me at what points you would rather put your money in?

I don't own a time machine.
I don't own a crystal ball.
Therefore, I don't time the market.

>the vanguard total market index fund is a publicly traded stock...
Actually it's not. And when you have enough financial education to understand why it's not, then we can resume this conversation.

yfw you realize that VOO

cannnot out perform or perform any better than a company

because it is in effect a conglomeration of companies, and lives and dies by the success of the companies inside it.

its not some fucking magic financial instrument moon mission

it is ass face.
i could buy it right now if i was a dumbass and thought it was a good asset to weigh down my portfolio with.

i love how u are condescendingly talking down 2 me while being completely wrong.

Marking to market is no different than what I said bud. Marking your assets to current market value when calculating the net asset value of a mutual fund is one of the only ways to do it kiddo.

>investopedia.com/ask/answers/04/032604.asp

Nowhere does anyone in this thread state that $VOO is representative of the entirety of Vanguard.

>put it in the fund and let it sit till your 60 user. a lot of people dont want to wait till their 60 but dont realize they still have another 20-30 years to go after that.
This advice is such a fucking meme

When you're in your late teens / early 20's you need a down payment for a house, you need a car, you need furniture for the house, you need to either pay for further education or have an emergency fund - and all you faggots sperg about "muh 60 year old $1M fund"

Fucking hell OP just put the $100k in bonds, get about 3% returns to keep it at inflation, then when you finally inherit it or when your mom agrees to give it to you, use it to get ahead in life, not to invest in a future walking frame and geriatric swinger parties

It's an ETF not a stock. He's just arguing semantics because he had his first Finance course at university recently. By "stock" you're meaning "security" and by "stock" he's meaning "equity." Make sense?

The explanation is their commission is probably better if they take consistent deposits over the year vs a large deposit and then nothing. It looks better on paper, makes them look like better salesmen etc.

I bet anything on fucking Earth that it's entirely the salesman (aka adviser) crafting his own paycheck

i thot u knew what we were talking about when the op said
VANGUARD INDEX FUND = VOO
i didn't know you were an autistic contrarian fool.

>this vanguard meme still going on

With 100k, pick three-ten different areas. It could be gold, oil, us equities, euro equities, and currencies, or it could be a different mix up. Learn how to actually diversify your risk and learn how to neutralize risk. (which are two different things) Look up common allocations for each type of instrument you are holding. (most people do gold at 5%)

You also probably don't want to put all the money into one account with one company. If you want to honestly manage that amount of money, you're going to have to put some work into it. If not, just get someone else to manage it for you.

Timing the market is less important than what your mother wants to do.
Maybe she wants to put money aside for your education, maybe she wants to use it as a pension, maybe she just wants to keep it safe with no risk of capital loss.
An independent financial advisor can design a solution that meets her needs and is also tax efficient. Find a good one and pay a fee up front for a plan. The bank advisor is likely to only recommend the bank's products or funds which pay the most commission.
You can become her money manager in simple scenarios if you're willing to learn. However for $100k, paying ~0.5% for professional advice now could save her a lot of money in the long term.

>Early 20's
>needing a down payment for shit that you actually don't NEED
This is why investing should be barred from kids under 25.

actually its quite the opposite.

big number always looks better.
and it makes the lump sum less liquid.
as opposed to being able 2 stop the drip and redirect it.

>those tabs
>those programs
>this much financial illiteracy

Jesus fuck. My eyes are bleeding. You are disgusting human garbage of some weird normie variety. You must go back.

He asked if he should buy VOO and VOOG and literally didn't know anything else about them in this post:
Stop trying so hard, you're going to hurt yourself.

Glad I didn't dump all my money in the market in 2008. Cost averaging to me is better.

>what I said bud
What you said was that fund managers set the NAV. Which is demonstrably and provably false. It's entirely based on the market and market prices.

This is a HIGHLY regulated industry. Federal statutes exist to govern this exact question. Stop pretending like there's some gray area here.

This.

Advisor: Why do one trade when I can make at least 12 commissions a year by convincing you to DCA?

Exactly. Under 25's need the money for living now and setting up their lives, not for planning ahead.

Then once you're all set up and comfortable, you can double your retirement efforts and catch up and then surpass what these spergs have saved up.

>Do your own research and DD. But look at the dips in my picture. All excellent buying opportunities as long as you don't freak out on the day-of and remember "the markets (usually) always go up."

>2011 with $100k. Dow is 11000
>"I want to invest but stocks are overpriced! I'll time the market and wait for a dip!"
>2012 Dow is 13000
>Dow then dips to 12200.
>Buying some! I'm so glad I waited for a dip!

you can dollar cost average your own money into an index stock thru any brokerage.

you dont need to pay someone to do it for you.

>Glad I didn't dump all my money in the market in 2008.
Yeah, that would probably be one of the 33% of cases where DCA outperformed LSI. Math is funny that way.

Then again, if we all had perfect hindsight, we'd all be perfect investors. But we don't and we aren't. If Strategy A haas a 66% of doing better than Strategy B, I'm picking Strategy A even though its possible it'll turn out to be the wrong choice. That's called living a smart life.

I've worked in banking/finance. If the adviser took in a large sum and then nothing, that means he met that months targets. If he doesn't meet next months targets, he's flagged. It also means if he took in a huge sum at once, and then nothing for a while, he can show a contraction in his portfolios when compared year on year

The Net Asset Value is most definitely set by the fund managers man are you fucking stupid? The NAV of a mutual fund is calculated by taking the summation of all stocks, bonds, and other securities (inc. cash) in the portfolio then subtracting operating expenses as well as the MANAGER's SALARY then dividing that number by the total number of shares of the mutual fund outstanding. How the portfolio is doing is important but how much fucking money the manager takes as payment (either as salary or as op. exp.) is even more important. Maybe you should pay more attention in your introductory finance courses.

>2008
>Yeah, that would probably be one of the 33% of cases where DCA outperformed LSI.

??? You can't be serious.

So you're using all caps to tell us that NAV reflects a funds internal expenses?

SHOCKING NEWS EVERYONE. THE NAV REFLECTS THE LIQUIDATION VALUE THAT A HOLDER WOULD RECEIVE IF THE FUND CLOSED.

/s

and while ur pathetic index fund is drooping your entire life savings....

Protip: closed-end funds can trade at over (or under) NAV so the liquidation value for a closed-end fund can be less than the NAV of the fund, it's not always the liquidation value of the fund that equals the net asset value.

Yet again, pay more attention in your introductory finance courses.

Oh look who it is, that dumbass kid that bought Zillow and thought he knew more than that guy with the huge portfolio with steady returns.

that account has only been open 2 months mind you
hey VOO shill. go head and post ur portfolio today.
i know ur out there.

post it faggot.

money talks bs walks.

u dont know more than me about finance because ur granddaddy left you a trust fund faggot.

>+3.64%

Meanwhile...

My "pathetic index fund" Vanguard 500 ETF (VOO) is +5.81% over 2 months.

What is the best fund platform to buy Vanguard?

You can't "buy Vanguard". You can buy Vanguard products (ETFs and mutual funds) though.

you mean 3 months. big difference.

and be honest. you only get bout 6% a year.
so you guys are due for your big dip.
if i were u i would pull it all out right now while u are unrealistically bubbled.
then push back in after it collapeses.

but your not going to . so in 4 months im gonna be here with 50% gains
and you;ll probably be at that same 5%.

and you'll be bummed out for like 2 months str9
lmfao.

So I would have to choose between ETF or mutual, are there many differences?

Read this book

John Bogle is the founder and retired CEO of The Vanguard Group who has an estimated net worth of $80 million. He is best known as the author of the 1999 book Common Sense in Mutual Funds: New Imperatives for the Intelligent Investor. The book became a best seller and is considered a classic.
John Bogle Net Worth - TheRichest
www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/celebrity-business/investors/john-bogle-net-worth/

Ray Dalio
15.9B USD

Charlie Munger
1.3B USD

Warren Buffett
64.7B USD

Stop being so mad at people with more money than you. Just because you're broke and have to use Robinhood doesn't mean that other people haven't been working longer than you and have larger portfolios than you. You're just showing your immaturity and stupidity mate.

that why ur ornery , cuz ur precious voo lost you money , while my goog recomendation made u cash?

theres still time 2 push into zillow btw.

its gonn pop up 2 39 within the few months.

You never once recommended Google. You shilled Uber and Zillow (both of which are pieces of shit, though for different reasons). I'm also not invested in $VOO, can you even read anything on that portfolio snapshot?

See anything wrong with the chart attached to this post? (I'll wait)

i always recommend google.

i don't see anything wrong with zillow.

thats the wrong chart btw.

spy voo same goddamn thing.

This thread is about Vanguard mutual funds, not the $SPY ETF. I'm still up $700 on SPY so I'm not too worried about minor dips.

As for the chart, you can't say "that's the wrong chart" when a chart doesn't look the way you'd like for it to. It's very much the chart of Zillow's price plotted against time over the last 2 or so years. It's a piece of shit buy, deal with it.

If you don't have anything to add to the discussion of mutual funds I'm not sure why you'd even come into this thread in the first place? Do you enjoy roleplaying that much? Do you need to post some screenshots of your Robinhood account to try and seek some validation on an online cooking-show discussion board? Maybe you just like 'sperging out?

you're ill informed. and mad that my portfolio posts more gainz than urs.

deal with it trust fund jabroni

Post your portfolio then kid. I can promise you're not up $500, much less $1,666, after today's trading session. Go ahead and post it thinking you pulling in 4% on a 200 portfolio is anything like me pulling in 2% on a $100k portfolio.

if my grandpa died i'd have a few 100 k 2 , but hes still alive.

you think hes proud of you waving all his hard earned money around on an internet forum?

Post your portfolio. If you don't then you're a broke idiot who is roleplaying and talking out of the side of his head on an Indonesian Olympic rowing message board.

...

$BRCM's last price was $35.09? Broadcom hasn't traded sub-$45 in quite a while bud. Maybe post an up-to-date snapshot of your portfolio.

why ? cant cope with the fact that someone out there has 10x's as much money as you just sitting around in a portfolio?

I don't believe that's an actual portfolio, much less yours. All of those "Last Price" quotes are really stale (old) so it's not a recent portfolio and the way that system is set up looks phony ("Reset Portfolio" as well as "Buy/Sell" under the Action tab as opposed to "Cover short" for shorts and just plain "Sell" for longs).

yea well i dont believe the one u posted is yours. so i guess were at a stale mate.
why dont u chill ur ass out ur all bent out of shape.

Yeah that's what I thought kid. Here's the exact same account I showed you before with a sell order reducing Netflix's weight within the portfolio. Stop roleplaying on this board.

this is the worst portfolio ive ever seen
please, stop what you are doing
(well, actually, don't, cause dumb money is always a necessity)

so this is what ppl grieving their grandfathers death do with their newfound inheritance.

parade around on forums pretending to be hot shot moguls.

lol.

i feel sorry for you.

it aint gonna bring grandpapy bak sweetheart.

this

Is it better to buy through the Vanguard website or use an investor platform which has more scope?

just buy thru brokerage.